Rallying call to save Royal British Legion clubs
- Today's leader
Letter: Changing the voting system would be a disaster
Tuesday 1st March 2011, 6:00AM GMT.
A ballot box is emptied ready for counting in Ludlow
Letter: It really troubles me greatly that people like Colin Firth and members of the Electoral Reform Society are campaigning for a change to the voting system.
This extraordinary waste of money – potentially costing over £200 million if approved – would be disastrous for our country.
At a time when as MPs we are facing serious concerns from constituents about the prospect of school closures, reconfiguration of hospital services cuts to local services helping the disabled it is a tragedy that all these people can think about is spending on changing the voting system.
They are all obviously so detached from the reality and hardship of many hard working people that they think it appropriate to waste this money.
Shame on them.
Daniel Kawczynski MP
Shrewsbury and Atcham
Sponsored Links
UK News
Most Commented
- Shropshire Council will face £8m redundancy bill
- Clampdown on Shrewsbury chuggers
- Bishop's gay marriage views do nothing to support bible teachings
- Letter: Alcohol price plans annoy me
- Letter: No sense in overseas job adverts
- Letter: Angered by close encounter of the furred kind
- The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff doesn't raise a smile
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Dear Daniel
There will always be something “more important” that you can cite as a distraction to something that doesn’t suit your own agenda. As a politician I would expect you to use more credible reasoning to support your argument. Implying that “A” is bad because there’s “X, Y and Z” to think about is an unsophisticated technique that belongs in the school playground.
Report abuse
What?
Ask Your Chum “Con”eron why he agreed to this in the first place along with the other condem lap dogs rather than some un-elected society.
Report abuse
Being resident in Greece, I am not fully aware of the nature of the changes being proposed, but I do believe the system does need changing after the circus the last election produced.
Three major parties were up for the leadership, the lesser of the three being the Lib-Dems.
No party won an outright victory, and the party who came last of the three end up pulling the strings, and the results are all too plain to see, disaster after disaster.
The whole set up is a joke, as are the people in charge now, the blind leading the blind. They see it as a chance to feather their nests before time runs out. Laughable,if it were not for so many suffering from their inept handling of the affairs of state.
Report abuse
It troubles me that you’ve used the word ‘shame’. By all means arge against reform (afterall, your party has most to loose on the AV system), but don’t label people shameful because you fail to agree with their take on a subject.
I could easily lable you as shameful, it is YOUR party who is pushing these cuts, rather than pushing up taxes.
Rather than give paint this as a decision between GOOD and EVIL, why not explain exactly what AV is, and how it will affect peoples votes – thats what people need, you simply telling us it is wrong.
Justify your views, Kawczynski.
Report abuse
This was the price the Conservatives had to pay the LibDems for the coalition deal. Without it the Conservatives would have to run a minority government which would not have been acceptable to the leadership as it would have exposed them to demands to return power from the EU from within their own party.
Detached from reality would be a good way of describing the whole political landscape in this country where those we elect take an oath to serve this nation state then insist that we do not get to vote on our membership of the very institution which is undermining the nation state, destroying democracy and creating voter apathy. As it forces every government of which ever party or coalition to work to the same set of rules. We are not actually electing a government or a Parliament of representatives but just a new management team and cannon fodder for the political party leaders.
AV will change nothing of substance because nothing can change unless the power to actually govern is returned to Westminster, so it is of supreme indifference which method we use to elect a group of EU facilitators and party MPs who have created their own power vacuum by denuding their own institution of the ability to make laws unless they have the authorization to do so from Brussels.
We should face the facts and either leave the EU or accept that whilst we remain within it we do not govern ourselves and thus do not need a fully functioning government system that does not actually govern but only implements laws made in a higher domain. Worried about saving money get rid of the whole outmoded system and just elect a few national managers and stop pretending what happens in Westminster is in anyway relevant to the people of this country.
Report abuse
I think the £200 million includes a figure for electronic counting machines which are not going to be used, so it is erroneous to base an argument against AV on these costs. I would have though there were much better arguments for sticking to FPTP than silly baseless scare tactics.
Report abuse
I believe it also includes the cost of the referendum, which will happen anyway.
Report abuse
Shame on him more like; is that the best the Right Honourable Member for Shrewsbury can do?
Of course it doesn’t suit his agenda, but please put a better argument than that together.
£200 million is a small price to pay for a more democratic, though not flawless, system.
Report abuse
200 million to change a totally unfair and unfit for purpose electoral system is disasterous for our country but multi – billion pound changes to the NHS which no one wants or needs is fine? Danny boy needs to sort out his priorities.
Report abuse
The 200 million is a complete lie.
It even includes the cost of the referendum (if it was not held at the same time as the local elections). This money is spent whichever way the referendum goes.
What a pity if we spent this money and still ended up with the same old 18th century voting system which has failed us so badly!
Report abuse
What is REALLY shameful is the scaremongering tactics of the #no2av team. Adverts implying babies will die if we spend money on AV. And constantly re-quoting £200m when the (Tory) Treasury have already disowned this figure. There has been a massive complaint to the Advertising Standards Agency about the “dead baby” advert – and rightly so.
And of course Daniel will keep on making such preposterous claims. He has no REAL argument against AV – indeed his own party (and most others, and the unions and many others) use AV to choose their leaders – we have all watched votes transferring on the TV, for example.
He is head of the “No” campaign, and got less than 50% at the last election – he is right to be worried!
But lets keep the debate sensible and truthful. @colincase #yes2av #yesinmay
Report abuse
So if Daniel Kawczynski honestly believes this country cannot currently afford a democratic and fair voting system, why isn’t he and the rest of the tory party ensuring that vodafone, barclays et al pay the correct amount of corporation tax?
If the government was doing it’s job properly in collecting tax we could be keeping our hospital departments and schools open AND have a fairer voting system.
Report abuse
This just in; ‘UK can’t afford democracy’ says MP.
Pathetic.
Blaming Colin Firth is just the icing on the cake – it’s either deliberate and underhand, or else Mr K is actually seriously deluded.
Report abuse
I totally agree. The thing we sanctify the most in this country – our democracy – is worth every penny we spend fulfilling it! If we base our democracy on the cheapest option available, we’ve lost sight of the whole meaning of the word.
Report abuse
Under the current voting system Mr Kawczynski knows that he can enjoy a job for life in Shrewsbury, despite being one of the worst attending MPs in the last parliament and mustering support from only 30% of the total electorate in the last election.
Is the real reason Mr Kawczynski is against improvements in democracy because he’ll have to work a little harder as MP?
Report abuse
Sounds like fear to me. We promote democracy to countries in the Middle East on a daily basis. Yet when you sit down and look at how our country is run, from national government to local government, we are not even close to a democracy. The people who give the weakest reasons for or against the proposed changes to the voting system have the weakest case. The people who complain the loudest are the ones who have most to lose.
Report abuse
‘They are all obviously so detached from the reality and hardship of many hard working people’…..errrr was it not your own party that agreed to holding the referendum in the first place?
As an MP i expect you to think about the content of your letters before writing them and at a guess this one must have taken no more than 2 minutes to think up AND write.
What’s your argument against AV? I haven’t actually formed an opinion either way yet but i know for a fact that people who argue one way or another without actually stating their argument aren’t very likely to get my vote.
Report abuse
our desperate Dan doesn’t like PR as it could put him out of a job.
Be a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.
With luck PR will rid Shrewsbury of this Turkey.
Report abuse
Don’t blame you for wanting him out if the level of intelligence displayed in his letter is anything to go by.
But if you want PR to do the job, you’ll be waiting a long time because AV is not PR.
Report abuse
Although AV is not PR some supporters of PR support the yes campaign because they consider it a step towards PR or at least a step forward and that a no vote might be interpereted as not wanting any change.
Report abuse
I am still waiting to hear the arguments for the present system and against AV – Pro AV organisations have been emailing me for months now with their arguments, the No2 AV people need to get on with promoting the reasons for their side, otherwise it will be a done deal. And this letter from someone who is suppose to represent backing for the present system is worse than a waste of time.
Report abuse
“At a time when as MPs we are facing serious concerns from constituents about the prospect of school closures, reconfiguration of hospital services cuts to local services helping the disabled it is a tragedy that all these people can think about is spending on changing the voting system.”
Daniel,you’re in the wrong party.
Report abuse
when i vote i pick 1 person, i dont pick a 2nd or even a 3rd choice from another party who policies i dont agree with.
Report abuse
Of course you don’t, you don’t have the option…yet.
But would you deny the people who would the choice ?
Report abuse
If a politician is against something all the more reason to be for it.
Report abuse
Basically yes! as it would be unfair on those who do not have 2nd and 3rd preference, skew the election towards those who really do not care about policies and entrench within politics the idea of changing managers who work within a set of rules defined outside of the state rather than changing governments who have the freedom to introduce their own polices.
Report abuse
Sorry that was in reply to Nistagmus “would you deny the people who would the choice”
Report abuse
Yeah whatever Daniel, we all know you oppose it because it will damage your lead in the Shrewsbury and Atcham seat.
Your only in this seat because of the rural voters support. I wouldn’t be surprised if when the boundary commission did their shake up that the S&A constituency would be expanded to include more rural voters.
As soon as this referendum is a NO, the Lib Dems will realise how thick they were and leave the coalition, bring on a general election and you’re out.
Report abuse
I’ll be voting against AV but I’d like to know why isn’t this referendum also being used to cover additional topics? For example, whether or not to : stay in the EU; adopt the Euro; restore capital punishment (especially for politicians who lie to get into power); adopt a UK Constitution; scrap the Human Rights Bill; make Fred Karno Prime Minister, etc etc…
It seems to be to be a grand opportunity to raise these questions – all for pretty much the same cost as asking one of them.
Report abuse
The AV system is a really bad voting system.
An important claim of the supporters of the AV is that “It penalises extremist parties, who are unlikely to gain many second-preference votes.” Well, yes, if you assume the following:
———-
You are a Labour voter. Therefore, you are not in any way going to vote for Tories. So you are left with the option of voting for the LIB-Dem, or any other party – all of which are extreme in one way or the other – may it be the Greens, the BNP or the Loonies.
So, if you decide that voting for the Lib-Dem is not your wish, you will be voting for a party that have one major theme engraved in it’s manifesto that is close to your heart. That will also be the epitome of Tactical Voting – You will be trying to pass your party a message that this or that issue is important for you.
That will put to shame the other claims of the yes campaigners for AV: “It eliminates the need for tactical voting.”
Now, how stupid can the UK voters be! You are lead into the best laid down trap: The Lib-Dem said that the AV is a compromise instead of having the proportional voting system.
This is not true. The AV is a lot better for them than the proportional voting system – as many UK voters will indeed avoid voting for a small extremists party – so they will vote for the Lb-Dem – they will think that they really do not have another choice for the second preference. The Lib-Dem will than be piggy carried to victory in many constitutes with the combined second choice of the two main party’s voters.
And at the same time, we will have some small and extremist parties in our Parliament – just like in the proportional voting system.
————
With two thirds of the MP’s lacked majority in their areas, one should not be blame to think that the Lib-Dem will become the biggest party in the Parliament. Now, that may not be a bad thing, you might say. Well, the fact is that if that happens, it means that the Lib-Dem won because they where the forced ‘there is nothing better to vote for as second choice’ for most voters.
Well. ‘nothing better’ is not really a political endorsement.
The Lib-Dem went to government for the AV and the AV alone – and not for the ministerial jobs at the current government, as James O’Brian from LBC claims. That calculation is the long term motivation. It promises all the current Lib-Dem MP’s government jobs in the future.
That is nothing less than the biggest political fraud ever. It is only one step down from a military putsch by the Lib-Dem, with the same effect of a revolution.
Report abuse